Is TLD a hunting game?

[mattyboi]

I see various hunting suggestions/requests/wishlists added to these forums from time to time, and very commonly this is met with "TLD isn't a hunting game; it's a survival game". I have mixed thoughts on this. I understand fully that TLD does not fit into the genre of hunting games, and that it isn't trying to. But I also understand that long term survival ultimately becomes highly dependent on hunting yields sooner or later in the course of a sandbox game (depending on difficulty level). In that case, since the player will ultimately be compelled to hunt at some point in the game to continue surviving, it is in fact -at least in my mind- a hunting game (sure, in theory you could subsist only on fish and rabbits, but at some point you'll need to replace your bedroll/clothes).

Now personally, I don't think having a large inventory of hunting weapons would add much to the experience of the game (I've previously advocated for a survival spear, but other than that I think the game doesn't need many more weapons, particularly firearms). And I don't think the games needs a terribly large library of potential prey either. But I have had one major problem with hunting in TLD, and that is with shot placement.

The following are a few basic anatomical diagrams of IMHO the two worst offenders in the game:

 

Anyone who ever went out hunting with their grandfather or took a class to get their hunting license has probably seem similar diagrams, or had the content explained to them, but essentially you want to aim just behind the shoulder to target the vital organs (lungs and heart). It's pretty universally acknowledged that this is the best placement for scoring reliable kill shots.

My problem is that in game, I'll spend time stalking an animal, sacrificing valuable calories and my cold meter (and often condition as well), waiting to get close enough, waiting for the animal to give me the right presentation, I'll put a shot right into it's breadbasket, and then sit and watch while it runs around for 2-3 in-game hours, never wanting to go down. It's especially unrewarding when I think I should have scored a heart shot. Having said that, I'm well aware that a shot in this location will not automatically drop a deer or other big game, but I've had enough experiences in the game watching wounded game run around for inordinate amount of time that it diminishes the gaming experience for me. In writing terms this would be called "suspension of disbelief", where I, the viewer, am pulled out of an otherwise immersive gaming experience, and become acutely aware that I am playing a game because of the lack of realism in the game play.

FYI, I say the deer and bear are the two worst offenders, because I never hunt rabbits to begin with, and I mostly shoot wolves when they are charging me anyway, and therefore only head shots are primarily available, however I do have this experience with wolves as well from time to time.

I can't think of a compelling reason to have this particular shot placement "undervalued" so to speak? If you score a hit the animal will die eventually; in theory this shouldn't affect economy/resource balancing issues, so why make the player wait unnecessarily?

On a related note, having prey animals become more active/available during dawn and dusk hours would make the game more challenging/realistic; could this be incorporated into the more challenging difficulty modes? Similarly, this is typically when predator animals also become more active, which would also increase the challenge of the game if incorporated.

[Boston123]

BY far, one of the most irritating aspects of this game is the fact that "head shots" are so highly rated.

Talk to any forest ranger, and they will complain for hours about the inconsiderate and frankly, stupid asshole "hunters" that go and blow a chunk of an animals skull off and let it die over the course of several days.

[cekivi]

5 minutes ago, Boston123 said:

BY far, one of the most irritating aspects of this game is the fact that "head shots" are so highly rated.

Talk to any forest ranger, and they will complain for hours about the inconsiderate and frankly, stupid asshole "hunters" that go and blow a chunk of an animals skull off and let it die over the course of several days.

I cannot emphasize this enough. I say the same thing almost word for word on every hunting thread I come across on the forums. Head shots are both unethical and generally ineffective. The game play mechanics should reflect this.

[Shane Retter]

15 minutes ago, Boston123 said:

BY far, one of the most irritating aspects of this game is the fact that "head shots" are so highly rated.

Talk to any forest ranger, and they will complain for hours about the inconsiderate and frankly, stupid asshole "hunters" that go and blow a chunk of an animals skull off and let it die over the course of several days.

Yep, I'm a hunter also, and head shots are the most inhuman shots to take, besides a gut shot. I've found skeletons of deer in the bush with their jaws smashed by a "missed" head shot, poor buggers just starve to death with weeks of agony.

I'd like to see rewards given for neck shots as an instant take down. Here in New Zealand, we use the "Halal Shot" more often in deer hunting .... leaves the heart untouched, but severs the main arteries coming from it ... the deer runs for just a few meters before it faints from massive blood loss as the heart beats harder to escape. Also, you still get one of the best bits ... roasted stuffed deer heart .

[Shane Retter]

I think some tweaks need to be made to the hunting side. Sure, it's not a "hunting" game ... but it is a survival game where hunting is it's core tactic. I'd like to see animals harder to find, and harder to stalk (sitting two meters from a deer on the ice, kind of feels like I'm shooting some kids pet), but make the rewards greater when you do manage to bag something. I know how I'd like to see it improved on .... but it would mean altering most of the calorie, and hunger system also.

[mattyboi]

I'm glad to see all the feedback and glad I'm not the only one who has had these thoughts.

I agree with @Shane Retter that the stalking aspect is very overpowered in the current game. I'd really like to see the challenge of hunting in the game increased by incorporating hunting strategies and compelling the player to think more tactically during the hunt, rather than going to route of "You didn't have your mouse quite lined up on the right pixels, so you'll either have to burn another bullet/arrow or watch this deer run around for a few hours". 

[togg]

A videogame is not a simulator. Why do we have to come back to this everytime? It can be, I guess the military likes this kind of idea and some "experts" do as well on their "field". But it's usually not.

Head shots cannot be overrated, not inside a videogame! How do you make intuitive all of the Good Hunter Practices to the player? And how does it make the experience better? What does it mean took a class to the hunting license? Or learning the "human shot"? Wow. The human shot. Ok. All the best if people don't learn the "human shots" after playing The Long Dark.

 

Of course hunting can be improved a lot. More clear and satisfying wind stuff, wolfpack behaviour and other animal interactions which are in the roadmap. But it's clear after all this time that realism is not one of the goals of this project.

 

edit: more activity on dask/dawn is interesting.

[Shane Retter]

@mattyboi this is why I say the hunger system would have to change as well. You should be able to store calories (fat) in good times, because then you could change animal behavior, and not have your character die from not being able to get meat every day ... or 30 days. I'd love to see things like wind direction play a big part, trying not to be smelt, while still staying sheltered from the wind yourself. Imagine having to really plan out a hunt .... but if successful, you could eat for a couple of weeks or more. Also, this would make animal skin items more of an 'end game' reward after months of hardship.

I already give myself a hard time for missing a shot, and wasting that bullet / arrow .... imagine if that may also be your only chance at getting meat for another 10 days or so.

[Shane Retter]

@togg I'd never expect a game to try and incorporate a complex Halal shot ... but a neck shot may be a reasonable ask. I imagine there are quite a few real life hunters like myself who play this ... and it just adds a little something extra to the satisfaction of seeing those brown pixels drop with one shot. The top half of the neck is already an instant drop in the game ... I'm more saying, maybe get an extra skill point or so for doing it.

[mattyboi]

49 minutes ago, togg said:

A videogame is not a simulator. Why do we have to come back to this everytime? It can be, I guess the military likes this kind of idea and some "experts" do as well on their "field". But it's usually not.

Head shots cannot be overrated, not inside a videogame! How do you make intuitive all of the Good Hunter Practices to the player? And how does it make the experience better? What does it mean took a class to the hunting license? Or learning the "human shot"? Wow. The human shot. Ok. All the best if people don't learn the "human shots" after playing The Long Dark.

 

Of course hunting can be improved a lot. More clear and satisfying wind stuff, wolfpack behaviour and other animal interactions which are in the roadmap. But it's clear after all this time that realism is not one of the goals of this project.

 

edit: more activity on dask/dawn is interesting.

1. I'd argue that TLD is a pretty good survival simulation in terms of entertainment value. Obviously it's not trying to recreate true to live human survival as most people would not find this entertaining. However, I don't think that by asking for realistic lung shots, myself and others are also saying "make TLD a hunting simulator". There is plenty of entertainment value to be had by simply adding a small element of realism.

2. Yes, head shots can be overrated, both in real hunting and in video game hunting, as others here have discussed.

3. Realistic hunting makes the experience better because people who have experience with real hunting will recognize the game play as realistic, and people who are not familiar with real hunting can recognize that it is realistic if they watch hunting videos, read hunting literature, or research hunting on the internet. Really, in a game that makes you chop open ice fishing holes before you can fish, or shred newspapers to make tinder plugs, or having fires/torches burn faster or burn out entirely in windy weather, having a realistic lung shot seems like a very basic and very simple request.

4. I'm not sure where you live, but depending on your local government, hunting may not be so simple as "I pick up a gun, go into the woods, and shoot stuff". In most states in the United States (where I live), you have to have a hunting license or permit, which often requires that you take a class to learn basic hunting safety, hunting laws applicable in your state, and so forth.

5. I believe that the "inhuman" shots referred to be @Shane Retter were intended to be "inhumane" shots. I don't think that he is advocating shooting humans.

6. As I have tried to say before, I understand that a hyper realistic survival simulator would not be entertaining to a very wide audience, and that any developer would have to concede aspects of realism in order to make a marketable game. But Hinterlands HAS incorporated many realistic elements. If you get wet, you get cold faster. If you get too cold, you get hypothermia. If you don't eat, you start starving. Etc. Why is it such a leap to think that shooting an animal in the lungs/heart is simply too much realism? Are there really any gamers playing TLD who would through their hands up in disgust and walk away because the game had realistic shot placement?

[togg]

10 hours ago, mattyboi said:

@Shane Retter

3. Realistic hunting makes the experience better because people who have experience with real hunting will recognize the game play as realistic, and people who are not familiar with real hunting can recognize that it is realistic if they watch hunting videos, read hunting literature, or research hunting on the internet. Really, in a game that makes you chop open ice fishing holes before you can fish, or shred newspapers to make tinder plugs, or having fires/torches burn faster or burn out entirely in windy weather, having a realistic lung shot seems like a very basic and very simple request.

 

That's exactly my problem. I don't want to read hunting literature or watch hunting videos. Let alon play a game that simulate hunting mechanics in realistic details. I would be horrified.

In another topic there was a person describing the torture and gore of caching fish in details and was like "the minigame of fishing could be complexified". Ok no, not like this thanks.

The lung shot doesn't botter me so much, in that case it would be more a problem of communication. What part of the body should be less important to shoot? No way you can remove the headshot. As a player I see the head and basically the rest of the body very blurry. I'm not able to do all those distinctions.

Like I said better to focus on complexify the strategy with other animals involved etc They're already doing it and I doubt it would be realistic.

 

[cekivi]

10 hours ago, togg said:

That's exactly my problem. I don't want to read hunting literature or watch hunting videos. Let alon play a game that simulate hunting mechanics in realistic details. I would be horrified.

[...]

The lung shot doesn't botter me so much, in that case it would be more a problem of communication. What part of the body should be less important to shoot? No way you can remove the headshot. As a player I see the head and basically the rest of the body very blurry. I'm not able to do all those distinctions.

Well, when you're hunting you're not trying to instantly kill an animal. "Critical Hits" are really a fabrication of the video game industry. What you are trying to do is injure the animal enough so it dies as quickly and as painlessly as possible. As such, you want the largest target possible (torso) with the greatest likelihood of being a fast, clean, mortal injury (the heart/lungs/liver). The animal's skull is so think an arrow wouldn't even pierce it. You'd just injure it and it may die days or weeks later as a result. Head shots are possible with a rifle but your target is the size of a walnut. Again, not a good idea.

The torso on the other hand is huge, easy to see, and full of vital organs the loss of any of which would be quickly fatal to an animal. As such, I don't think this one change (removal of the "head shot critical") would be bad design. You're teaching your players something (hunting ethics), simplifying mechanics (large torso = kill, elsewhere = miss), and getting rid of a gaming cliche that I personally don't think fits into the feel of the long dark. If you want to keep critical hits fine but there should at least be a penalty for attempting head shots.

[togg]

14 hours ago, cekivi said:

Well, when you're hunting you're not trying to instantly kill an animal. "Critical Hits" are really a fabrication of the video game industry. What you are trying to do is injure the animal enough so it dies as quickly and as painlessly as possible. As such, you want the largest target possible (torso) with the greatest likelihood of being a fast, clean, mortal injury (the heart/lungs/liver). The animal's skull is so think an arrow wouldn't even pierce it. You'd just injure it and it may die days or weeks later as a result. Head shots are possible with a rifle but your target is the size of a walnut. Again, not a good idea.

The torso on the other hand is huge, easy to see, and full of vital organs the loss of any of which would be quickly fatal to an animal. As such, I don't think this one change (removal of the "head shot critical") would be bad design. You're teaching your players something (hunting ethics), simplifying mechanics (large torso = kill, elsewhere = miss), and getting rid of a gaming cliche that I personally don't think fits into the feel of the long dark. If you want to keep critical hits fine but there should at least be a penalty for attempting head shots.

Why headshots don't fit into the feel of the long dark? It's not a realistic game. It has satisfying little gestures, an appereance of realism is present only when satisfying. Taking a good shot on a smaller target that is generally recognized as vital is the best possible design.

Even if hunting ethic is lost so be it. 99.9% of players will never have to hunt in their life, there's no need to learn hard facts. Having a game that makes you think about situations like solitude, survival and society problems is a different level. I've personally not learn any "guide thing" from the long dark and that's perfectly fine.

[norup]

There sure is room for improvement. Just as you can be frustrated that a perfect shot does not kill quickly, some lousy hits should not be able to kill...

[cekivi]

On ‎2017‎-‎03‎-‎25 at 8:53 AM, norup said:

There sure is room for improvement. Just as you can be frustrated that a perfect shot does not kill quickly, some lousy hits should not be able to kill...

And therein lies the other problem.

@togg: My problem isn't just the ethics part. It's also arbitrarily punishing players for making the "easy" torso shot versus the "critical" head shot. As someone who has spent a lot of times outdoors I just find it particularly galling.

[mattyboi]

4 hours ago, cekivi said:

And therein lies the other problem.

@togg: My problem isn't just the ethics part. It's also arbitrarily punishing players for making the "easy" torso shot versus the "critical" head shot. As someone who has spent a lot of times outdoors I just find it particularly galling.

I wouldn't say torso shots are "easy" either; it's not like you can plug a deer anywhere in the torso and expect that it will just go down. You really have to know your anatomy and aim for the heart. 

[cekivi]

7 hours ago, mattyboi said:

I wouldn't say torso shots are "easy" either; it's not like you can plug a deer anywhere in the torso and expect that it will just go down. You really have to know your anatomy and aim for the heart. 

True but there is a much larger margin of error  

[Shane Retter]

Actually, heart shots are not great ... a deer can go a long way with a ruptured heart, their arteries automatically constrict, and they run on the blood already in their muscles and brain, and they can be impossible to find. Torso is more of a lung shot ... or an artery shot, especially if the bullet enters or exits through the front of the chest just below the throat.

As for the game ... neck shots are already an instant drop that I use, so I don't know why all the fuss about placing a points reward hit box there, and doing something different to all the other games that hold head shots as the king of all shots. I'm a little nerdy ... ok, maybe a lot, when it comes to enjoying tiny little details like that.

[mattyboi]

I've never had trouble with a deer bleeding out from a heart shot, but that's just my $0.02.

[Ohbal]

Great discussion guys. I had mixed feelings about this topic, at first my position was closer to @togg's but I can say that while reading I've kind of switched sides. At the end of the day, if you can learn interesting and useful things while enjoying a game, why not take the step?

Point of agreement: 99.9% of TLD players will go for the head, and we won't have to hunt (hopefully) in our lives. This seems to be the biggest "con" to me. 

That said, I'm thankfull to @cekivi @mattyboi @Shane Retterand @Boston123 for the information shared. I hadn't ever thought about it that way and it makes perfect sense. The mind-picture of the poor deer with the jaw broken was heart-breaking. 

I also think including ethics into TLD would fit quite well. Maybe the hunting books, besides increasing the skill, could include actual information about how to hunt the different wildlife in the form of ilustrations so any player can learn the way the game works. 

[cekivi]

2 hours ago, Ohbal said:

I also think including ethics into TLD would fit quite well. Maybe the hunting books, besides increasing the skill, could include actual information about how to hunt the different wildlife in the form of ilustrations so any player can learn the way the game works. 

That'd actually be really neat for all the skill books. I know it's more work for the dev team but it's the little details like books you can actually read that makes games so immersive.

[mattyboi]

@Ohbal There's actually a lot of hunting ethics that we're still not addressing. Harvesting meat for example; if you shot a deer and only took the best steaks and left everything else you'd be in trouble with the game warden where I'm from.

There's also a lot with the hunting mechanics in TLD that isn't realistic, such as taking hours upon hours to harvest a bear, or only getting 9kgs of meat from a full grown buck, etc. The thing is, I understand that the hunting has to work as a component of the overall survival, and Hinterlands can't tamper with a lot of these mechanics without ruining the overall balance of the game. That's fine, and I accept that.

I'm only picking on the shot placement issue because it would only be a very small tweak and would have virtually no impact on the balance of the game whatsoever; again, shots in the torso already result in death of the animal in TLD, I'm only arguing that the time frame should be shortened.

[Crocket]

Interesting discussion. @togg the game is already "teaching" the player how to hunt in TLD by rewarding shots to the head and penalising shots to anywhere else on the animal by making the player burn a few hours waiting for the animal to die. There is no manual anywhere that says "hit the deer in the head to deal the most damage", the game simply adheres to the unwritten videogame law which says "always go for headshots".

Implementing the suggestion made by @mattyboi wouldn't require in-game manuals or a youtube video on the finer points of ethical deer hunting, it would merely require a new player to aim for the head (under the assumption that this would deal the most damage, as it does in CoD), only to miss due to bow sway and land a hit on the deer's chest. The deer goes down! The player thus learns that chest shots appear to do more damage than headshots, and adjusts his playstyle accordingly. Literally nothing is lost, and the game scores one more point towards "realism"!

Quote

@togg: "Taking a good shot on a smaller target that is generally recognized as vital is the best possible design"

From a game design standpoint, I totally agree with you here. There just doesn't seem to be a good justification for that "smaller target" being the head, which submits to video game cliché out of convenience more than anything, rather than a designated and consistent spot on the animal's chest. Finding the "sweet spot" on your prey, and having a slightly different spot for each animal is a cool mechanic! No knowledge of real life hunting required!

[mattyboi]

51 minutes ago, Crocket said:

(under the assumption that this would deal the most damage, as it does in CoD)

Interestingly, CoD and other FPS games also create a false sense of realism in this regard, as most law enforcement/military personnel are also trained to aim for center of mass (the chest) rather than trying to score head shots as well. Really, head hunting is something that primarily exists in gaming and not in the real world.

In the case of the FPS genre, I actually don't have a problem with this; as game play exists entirely of players shooting each other's avatars, it makes sense that players who can hit smaller targets should be rewarded with more damage.

In the case of TLD or other survival games, the hunting is a component of overall survival, and for the reasons discussed previously, I personally don't believe the head shot works very well in this context. But hey; ultimately I'm not even arguing that the head shot should be eliminated from TLD; I'm only saying that lung/heart shots should be rewarded with a faster kill than the current mechanics allow.

[Dug]

I might be missing something from this discussion but whenever I take a heart/lung shot at a deer, in TLD, it drops where it stands. The one time it didn't was when I botched the shot and accidentally shot it in the rump.